@JeffYoung, many thanks, this was exactly what I was looking for. I’ve set it to 0.001 and the results are better, though not ideal. Apparently KiCad won’t go lower than 0.001. As suggested in the first reply, KiCad changed to using arcs would be ideal solution.
@BlackCoffee, yes, as you’ve already said, your remark is snarky. And patronizing. I have the impression you haven’t even understood my initial post as the rough edges lead to misclassification of the board, leading to higher cost. If that wasn’t the case, I could care less about the rough edges for the exact reasons you mentioned.
@paulvdh, designing right to the edge is exactly what I’ve not been doing. I’ve left just enough space between two traces to allow the area to be filled. Sure, you could argue I’ve designed it to the edge regarding the possibility to fill accurately but then we are getting even further off topic as I was merely looking for a simple answer though I won’t reject viable alternatives. I generally spend a major part of my time not to have traces spaced at the minimum but leave gaps wherever possible for a best possible ground distribution. See here:
